Unreasonable contract terms that make cancellation difficult and costly.

Slow and inadequate service responses that leave families without heating in freezing winters or air conditioning during extreme summer heat.

Misleading technician recommendations—many customers report being advised to replace rather than repair functioning equipment, pressuring them into expensive new contracts.

Lack of accountability despite growing complaints and even CBC investigations into these practices.

Our Demands
We, the undersigned, call on the Ontario government and regulators to implement urgent policy changes to protect consumers from predatory HVAC rental practices. Specifically, we demand:
1. Fair Buyout Prices – Buyout costs must be based on the actual depreciated value of equipment, not arbitrary inflated fees.

2. Faster Service Response – HVAC companies must respond to no-heat and no-cooling emergencies within 24 to 48 hours to prevent life-threatening situations.

3. No Contracts Without Real Signatures – Companies must obtain physical or legally verified digital signatures, ensuring customers fully understand contract terms before signing.

4. Easy Rental Cancellation – Consumers must have the right to cancel without penalties or hidden fees if they experience:
Unresolved service failures.
Misleading sales tactics.
Unfair contract terms.

5. Emergency Cancellation Rights – If HVAC service is not restored within 48 hours, customers must have the right to cancel without penalty, including waiving all removal and delivery fees.

6. Protection Against Misleading Technician Advice – Companies must be held accountable for technicians who falsely claim repairs are impossible and instead push costly equipment replacements or new contracts.

Why This Cannot Wait:
Many Ontarians have been misled, financially exploited, or left without essential heating or cooling due to these unfair practices. Some were pressured into contracts through aggressive door-to-door sales tactics, while others were wrongly told that repairs were not an option. Even when customers try to cancel, they face outrageous fees and legal loopholes that trap them in unfair agreements.

Despite growing complaints and media investigations, these companies continue to operate without meaningful regulation. It’s time for the Ontario government to step in and protect consumers.

Discussions in online forums and owner groups indicate that this problem is not isolated. The tapping noise, often occurring during long drives or after exposure to sunlight, detracts from the vehicle's comfort and raises concerns about the quality of its design and manufacturing. Despite multiple complaints, Suzuki has yet to acknowledge the issue or provide a satisfactory solution.

This issue affects the driving experience and may indicate a deeper flaw in the vehicle’s design or material selection, leaving many owners frustrated and seeking resolution. We believe Suzuki should investigate this matter thoroughly and offer an appropriate solution, whether through repairs, replacement parts, or an official recall.

Mark Zuckerberg, please clean out your platforms of these awful companies and make them a safe place for people to socialise, share ideas and remain up to date with friends and loved ones.

Ban the promoting of all Multi-Level Marketing companies (MLM's)/Network Marketing companies, and their products, on Facebook and all other platforms owned by Facebook. TikTok has already banned MLM's on their platform, we kindly request that Facebook does the same.

Mark Zuckerberg, please clean out your platforms of these awful companies and make them a safe place for people to socialise, share ideas and remain up to date with friends and loved ones

Source: Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia

A majority of the staff, drivers and phone operators employed at KTEL Thiras, in Santorini island continue to exhibit verbal abuse and racially discriminate against foreign tourists.

There are hundreds of online reviews documenting instances of verbal and physical abuse as well as racial slurs. This behaviour and their indifference to the safety and wellbeing of the passengers carries over to their driving, pushing people on or off the bus and mistreating individuals that are confused by lacking information.

Bahrain classifies VAPE as a TOBACCO product and applies 100% tax. Although vaping contains nicotine, is does not contain any tobacco.

Smoke is the result of combustion. When combustion occurs, new chemicals form through the process of oxidation. Smoke contains thousands of new chemicals different from those initially burned. Fire is what creates smoke. When you smoke a tobacco, a fire must be involved to create the smoke.

When a substance becomes gaseous, at a temperature that is lower than its point of combustion, it is considered vapor. The chemicals that are in vapor are the same as those found in the vaporized substance. Vaporizing something is what happens when you heat water on a stove. When water begins to boil, it creates vapor. While the vapor is in a different state, it still has the same chemical makeup as the liquid water.

The biggest takeaway is the fact that vaporizing does not create any new compounds. Vapor maintains the same compounds as the substance that created it.

The 2016 Royal College of Physicians (RCP) report “Nicotine Without Smoke” says that “robust evidence on the safety of long-term nicotine use in humans from the 5-year Lung Health Study, in which participants were actively encouraged to use Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) for several months and many continued to consume NRT for a much longer period, demonstrates no association between sustained NRT use and the occurrence of cancer (lung, gastrointestinal or any cancer) or cardiovascular disease.”

Cancers from smoking are caused by the combustion of tobacco. The smoke forms a sticky chemical slurry called tar, and the tar coats delicate parts of the lungs. Over the course of years, the damage created by tar in the lungs can lead to tumor growth. According to the US National Cancer Institute (NCI), most of the cancer-causing substances in cigarette smoke are in the tar. Tar also causes damage that can lead to lung diseases like emphysema and bronchitis.

E-cigarettes don’t produce tar, because they don’t burn (or even contain) tobacco or other plant material. There are known carcinogens in vapor, but they’re in tiny concentrations that are unlikely to pose any risk to vapers. Most studies that have raised alarms about cancer risk from vaping have used poor methods, including using smoking machines to take too-frequent or too-long drags, or vaping at unrealistic high temperatures on dry wicks. Those things wouldn’t happen to actual vapers, because the result — known as dry hits or dry puffs — is unbearable to breathe.

“In normal conditions of use, toxin levels in inhaled e-cigarette vapour are probably well below prescribed threshold limit values for occupational exposure, in which case significant long-term harm is unlikely,” says the RCP report. “Some harm from sustained exposure to low levels of toxins over many years may yet emerge, but the magnitude of these risks relative to those of sustained tobacco smoking is likely to be small.”

A recent study at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland found that the cancer danger of vaping is almost as low as for nicotine replacement therapies like patches and gum — less than one percent. “This study should put to rest any doubt within the tobacco control movement about whether vaping greatly reduces health risk compared to smoking,” wrote Boston University’s Dr. Michael Siegel.

Smoking cigarettes causes about a third of all the heart disease deaths every year, according to the US Surgeon General. Those deaths come in the form of heart attacks, heart failure, stroke, aneurisms, sudden cardiac arrest, and several other kinds of cardiovascular events that can be caused by conditions in the body that are caused or made worse by smoking.

As with cancer, nicotine isn’t a primary cause of acute cardiovascular events. The US Surgeon General’s 2014 report says that “international epidemiologic evidence, and data from clinical trials of nicotine patches, suggests that chemical components in smoke other than nicotine are more important in elevating the risk of death from MI [myocardial infarction — heart attacks] and stroke.”

By and large, it’s the other things in smoke that cause heart disease and death. Oxidant chemicals, free radicals, particulates, and carbon monoxide all damage the heart and circulatory system in many ways, according to the CDC.

Smoking can raise triglycerides and lower the HDL (“good”) cholesterol, and increase the buildup of plaque (from fat, cholesterol, calcium and other substances) in blood vessels. It can also thicken and constrict the vessels, and damage the cells that line them. It reduces oxygen in the blood and makes it sticky and more prone to clot. And when blood clots, it can block the flow to the heart and brain, causing heart attacks and stroke.

And perhaps the most dangerous constituent of cigarette smoke with regard to cardiovascular health — carbon monoxide — is not found in e-cig vapor at all.

There has been no research to date showing any provable cardiovascular danger from vaping.

For many smokers, taking up vaping works immediately — whether coming from cigarettes, pipes, cigars, or even hookah. For others though, it can take months to finally say goodbye to combustion. And for some, it never happens. If you’re a smoker who wants to quit, there are options that will work for you — if you choose to make some effort to find them. But there’s no longer a reason to say that “vaping doesn’t work.” Because it really can. And there’s no question now about whether vaping is safer than smoking.

Let us raise awareness, not only in Bahrain but the rest of the world, that Vaping is not Tobacco and should not be classified as such. Vaping can save lives by helping smokers stop tobacco use.

As always, the devil is in the details. Here are five key issues to consider in your comments:

1. Safety. A worldwide scientific consensus agrees that foods and ingredients that come from GM crops are as safe as those from conventionally bred crops. Any labeling standard should not mislead consumers into thinking otherwise. The USDA proposes to use the term “bioengineered" (BE), rather than negative terms like GMO, and nonthreatening symbols that do not evoke fear. Comments are being sought on the proposed symbols, the term "bioengineered," and the disclosure language.

2. Transparency. The USDA needs to set a threshold level beneath which disclosure is not required. It has proposed three options: a) inadvertent or technically unavoidable, and no more than 5% of the specific ingredient by weight; b) inadvertent or technically unavoidable, and no more than 0.9% of the specific ingredient by weight; and c) total amount of BE ingredients no more than 5% of the total weight of the product. Which do you support?

3. Convenience. The law allows companies to disclose BE ingredients on a label via one of three options: words, a symbol, and scannable QR codes. The USDA wants comments on a proposed fourth option — a text message delivered to a consumer's phone — as well as where and at what size disclosure should appear on a label.

4. Definition. In keeping with the language of the law, products created through pioneering editing tools like CRISPR would not be disclosed if the end result mimics conventional breeding or could potentially be “found in nature.” The USDA seeks comments on the definition of “conventional breeding” and "found in nature."

5. Disclosure. The USDA is deciding if highly refined products like sucrose, dextrose, cornstarch, high-fructose corn syrup and vegetable oils, which are produced from GM crops but biologically and chemically identical to those made from non-GM crops, should be disclosed. This decision will have disclosure implications for a wide range of foods.